NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two mobile graphics processors. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M dominates the only head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database, while the GT 755M has no direct wins in any common test. The OpenCL compute test tells the story: the GTX 970M scores 18,946 points against the GT 755M's 4,934, a 284% advantage. That is not a marginal gap; it is a generational leap in raw compute throughput.

Looking at the broader database entries, the GTX 970M posts an average benchmark score of 4,628 across ten recorded tests. Its percentile ranking sits at 27, meaning it outperforms roughly a quarter of all GPUs in the database. The GT 755M, by contrast, averages 4,033 across only two recorded tests, with a percentile of 24. The difference in average score is modest, about 14.7%, but the test coverage disparity matters. The GTX 970M has been evaluated across DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 workloads, 3DMark Steel Nomad, OpenCL, Vulkan, 2D graphics, and compute tasks. The GT 755M only appears in OpenCL and Metal tests.

Where each one wins is therefore largely a matter of workload breadth. The GTX 970M wins every category in which both have data, and it also provides verified performance in legacy DirectX APIs that the GT 755M simply has no recorded scores for. In practical terms, the GTX 970M is the stronger choice for any compute-heavy or modern graphics workload, while the GT 755M's only recorded victory is in the Metal API, where it scores 3,132, a test the GTX 970M was never subjected to in the database.

# Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural generations, and the differences are substantial. The GTX 970M uses the GM204 chip built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, part of the GeForce 900M generation. The GT 755M uses the GK107 chip on the older Kepler architecture from the GeForce 700M generation. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The GTX 970M packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The GT 755M is far smaller: 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, with a density of 10.8 million per square millimeter. The GTX 970M has over four times the transistor count and more than three times the die area. This scale difference translates directly into a massive gap in execution resources.

The GTX 970M features 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 48 raster operation pipelines. The GT 755M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That means the GTX 970M offers 3.3 times the shader count, 2.5 times the texture units, and 3 times the ROPs. Clock speeds partially compensate for the GT 755M's smaller configuration: its base clock runs at 980 MHz with a boost of 1020 MHz, while the GTX 970M runs at 924 MHz base and 1038 MHz boost. The boost clocks are nearly identical, but the GTX 970M's overwhelming resource advantage makes the clock parity irrelevant.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The GTX 970M comes with 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 120.3 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 5 Gbps. The GT 755M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth at 5.4 Gbps effective. The GTX 970M has nearly 40% more memory bandwidth and three times the capacity. For modern games and compute workloads, that memory headroom is decisive.

The interface differs as well. The GTX 970M uses an MXM-B (3.0) connector, while the GT 755M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Both are MXM modules with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The GT 755M has a specified TDP of 50 W, while the GTX 970M has no TDP listed in the database. API support also reflects the architectural gap: the GTX 970M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the GT 755M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and the older Vulkan 1.2.175.

The GTX 970M was released in October 2014, succeeding the GeForce 800M and preceding the GeForce 10 Mobile series. The GT 755M launched in June 2013, succeeding the GeForce 600M and preceding the GeForce 800M. Both are end-of-life products, but the GTX 970M represents a newer generation with a more modern feature set and significantly more capable hardware.

# The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most users: the GTX 970M outperforms the GT 755M in every test where both have recorded scores, often by enormous margins. In the only direct head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 970M scores 18,946 against 4,934. That is a 284% advantage, more than tripling the GT 755M's result. For any user running OpenCL compute workloads, the GTX 970M is categorically superior.

The GTX 970M also offers better raw throughput metrics. Its pixel rate is 49.82 GPixel/s versus 8.160 GPixel/s for the GT 755M, a sixfold difference. Texture rate stands at 83.04 GTexel/s versus 32.64 GTexel/s, a 154% advantage. FP32 compute reaches 2.657 TFLOPS compared to 783.4 GFLOPS, meaning the GTX 970M delivers about 3.4 times the single-precision floating-point performance. These are not incremental improvements; they represent a different performance class entirely.

Who should pick the GT 755M? Users constrained by the 50 W TDP might find it attractive, as it is the only power figure recorded in the database for either card. The GT 755M also has a recorded Metal benchmark score of 3,132, which the GTX 970M lacks entirely. For macOS or Metal-specific workloads, the GT 755M at least has documented capability, though no direct comparison exists. The GT 755M's smaller die and lower transistor count also suggest simpler thermal management in thin laptops, though the database does not record thermal specifications.

The GTX 970M is the obvious choice for gaming, compute, and any modern graphics API workload. Its DirectX 12_1 support, Vulkan 1.4 compatibility, 6 GB memory capacity, and 120.3 GB/s bandwidth position it as a far more future-proof mobile GPU. The GT 755M's DirectX 12 (11_0) support and 2 GB memory limit it to older titles and lighter workloads. The average benchmark score reinforces this: the GTX 970M averages 4,628 across ten tests, while the GT 755M averages 4,033 across just two tests, and those two tests do not include the demanding DirectX or 3DMark suites.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The GTX 970M scores 18,946 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the GT 755M's 4,934, a 284% advantage for the GTX 970M.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The GTX 970M has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 120.3 GB/s bandwidth. The GT 755M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but at different levels. The GTX 970M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GT 755M supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: What is the process node and architecture for each?

A: Both use a 28 nm TSMC process. The GTX 970M uses Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip, while the GT 755M uses Kepler architecture with the GK107 chip.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 970M has 1,280 shading units, compared to the GT 755M's 384 shading units, a 3.3x difference.

Q: What is the GT 755M's power draw?

A: The GT 755M has a recorded TDP of 50 W. The GTX 970M has no TDP listed in the database.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 970M scores 18,946 points against the GT 755M's 4,934 points, winning by a 284% margin. This single test captures the compute gap between the two architectures. The OpenCL score reflects the GTX 970M's 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 2.657 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, all of which dwarf the GT 755M's 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 783.4 GFLOPS.

The broader benchmark suite for the GTX 970M provides context for where else it excels. In PassMark G3D, it scores 5,704, far above its average of 4,628 across all ten tests. Its best relative result is in PassMark DirectX 9, where it scores 99, and its weakest is PassMark DirectX 12 at 24. The GT 755M has no recorded scores in any of these tests, so the database offers no direct comparison for legacy DirectX performance. The GT 755M does have a Geekbench Metal score of 3,132, a test absent from the GTX 970M's record.

In the nearest rival comparisons, the GTX 970M sits within 1.1% of a cluster of midrange GPUs. It is 0.2% ahead of the Quadro M3000M, 0.6% behind the Radeon R5 M320 and Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, and 1.1% ahead of the Radeon R5 M230. The GT 755M similarly clusters with its rivals: 0.5% ahead of the FirePro M4150, 1% behind the Intel HD Graphics 630, 1.4% ahead of the Radeon HD 6850 X2, and 1.5% behind the Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB. These narrow margins indicate that both GPUs sit in crowded performance tiers, but the GTX 970M's tier is roughly 14.7% higher on average.

The pixel rate comparison is stark: the GTX 970M reaches 49.82 GPixel/s while the GT 755M manages 8.160 GPixel/s, a sixfold difference. Texture rate shows the GTX 970M at 83.04 GTexel/s versus 32.64 GTexel/s. FP32 compute, the most telling metric for general-purpose workloads, shows the GTX 970M at 2.657 TFLOPS versus 783.4 GFLOPS for the GT 755M. The GTX 970M also has a substantially larger die, 398 mm² versus 118 mm², and more than four times the transistor budget, 5,200 million versus 1,270 million.

The only category where the GT 755M has an advantage is in raw clock speed at memory level: its memory runs at 1350 MHz with 5.4 Gbps effective, while the GTX 970M's memory runs at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective. However, the GTX 970M's wider 192-bit bus versus 128-bit still yields far higher total bandwidth, 120.3 GB/s versus 86.40 GB/s. The base and boost clocks are also close, with the GT 755M at 980 MHz and 1020 MHz versus the GTX 970M's 924 MHz and 1038 MHz. None of these small clock advantages close the massive gap in execution resources.

For users deciding between these two mobile GPUs, the recorded data offers no ambiguity. The GTX 970M wins the only shared benchmark by a 284% margin, has superior memory capacity and bandwidth, more shading units and ROPs, higher pixel and texture rates, and more than triple the FP32 compute throughput. The GT 755M retains value only in its lower 50 W TDP and its recorded Metal benchmark score, neither of which the GTX 970M has a direct counterpoint to in the database. The GTX 970M is the stronger performer in every measurable category where the two overlap, and the margin is not close.